Sunday, April 29, 2012

Today
we live in a creative world in which our productivity depends on how efficient
we are at using our minds.

Every human being is born being a genius. In a
study, children that were two to four years old were tested and 95% of them
resulted to be highly creative, imaginative, and innovative. Also, they showed
a high capacity for abstract thinking. The same test was done on the same
children when they were about seven years of age and only four percent tested
out as highly creative. This is because, according to the video, being creative
and thinking abstractly is discouraged in children.

Intelligence follows the law of
use. This law says that with any human faculty, if we don’t use it we lose it.
This higher, “superconscious” intelligence seen on children and on great minds
like Mozart and Edison is never totally lost. Instead, it becomes a latent
capability that is always available for us. In order to take full advantage of
this intelligence, we have to trust and have faith in the value of our insights
and thoughts. Also, we have to set clear goals, be positive and have a relaxed
state of mind. Concentration is also essential when trying to formulate answers
to our problems.

Creativity and abstract thinking is
described as a muscle; the more we use it, the more of it we have. And if we exercise
it often it, the easier it will become to see things from different
perspectives, therefore allowing us to solve problems more efficiently.

Analysis:

This
video describes intelligence as being both nature and nurture. From the nature
point of view, it says that everybody is born with the same capability and that
this “superconscious” intelligence is innate in human beings. On the other
hand, it is also affected by the way we are brought up and the way we ourselves
use our mental abilities in daily life. Our motivations and environment also
make a difference, which shows that the nurture idea is very important when it
comes to intelligence.

Questions:

Why is creativity said to be discouraged in today’s world?

If intelligence is indeed innate, does everyone have the
same level of intelligence or does it vary?

Saturday, April 21, 2012

The Human Genome Project: Ethical Implications

Summary:

Genetic Engineering

The first ethical problem that The Human Genome project
deals with is the issue of genetic engineering, which is the manipulation of
genes. The purpose of the project is to map the human genetic blueprint. This
would allow scientists to link diseases to the genes that cause them and therefore
develop treatments. Although the main goal of the project is to find these “faulty”
genes, it also involves finding the specific genes linked to physical and psychological
traits. As a result, scientists would be able to use this information to
manipulate these traits by using genetic engineering.

There are two types of genetic intervention: somatic cell
and germline intervention.

Changes made through somatic cell manipulation are limited
to one individual while changes made through germline manipulation are passed
on to the genome of future generations. Germline interventions involve more
ethical concerns than somatic cell interventions. This is because, unlike risks
involving somatic cell manipulation which only influence one single person,
risks involving germline interventions can be passed on to future generations. However, germline manipulations can be way more
efficient at permanently getting rid of certain diseases.

Genetic engineering
can also be scientifically problematic. This is because in order to perfect the
enhancement of genes there are other risks that may arise from it. For example,
many diseases depend on more than one gene, and there is a high probability
that one of the genes might also be responsible for other parts of the organism.

Analysis

The major concern that The Human Genome Project deals with
is whether or not genetic engineering is ethical. The information being
collected from the project allows scientists to locate the genes responsible for
specific traits. Although they haven’t found which specific set of genes are
responsible for intelligence, there is a very high possibility that they will do
so in the near future. If they do so scientists could, just like they could
with any other trait, alter them to make someone more or less intelligent.
Although this is not the goal of the project, it is something that we have to
keep in mind.

Also, there is the problem of somatic cell and germline intervention.
Germline manipulation can be more
efficient at getting rid of a disease not only for one individual but also for
his or her future generations. But this is also true for other physical and psychological
traits. If one person decides to alter his or her physical appearance and get
rid of certain characteristics, this will also affect future generations.

Questions:

·Is it worth taking the risk of developing unexpected
problems in order to develop treatments for genetic disorders?

·How might finding the genes responsible for
intelligence be helpful or problematic?

Sunday, April 15, 2012

Summary:

The
Human Genome Project is a coordinated science project which started in 1990 with
the purpose of mapping the human genetic blueprint.

Humans
are made up of trillions of cells each of which contains genetic material called
DNA. Within these long filaments reside the genes that we inherit from our
parents. Scientists have found that some (if not all) diseases are linked to
abnormalities in the genes. Locating and mapping the human genetic blueprint can
help scientists understand these genetic abnormalities and the interplay of
several genes which cause disorders such as cystic fibrosis and Duchene
muscular dystrophy.

Mapping the human genes has proved
to be no easy task. The human genome is considered to be the “master library” which
contains all of the genetic information which resides in twenty four different
chromosomes. Each cell in the human body contains DNA filaments that can be up
to six feet long within its nucleus. In each of these filaments there are six
billion base pairs.

Recently, investigators found that
the gene responsible for Huntington’s disease was located on chromosome four,
but even after a decade of study they still don’t know which gene in particular.
This shows how arduous it can be to pinpoint specific genes. One way to map these genes is to compare the
chromosomes of many people with the same disease or characteristic. By finding
similarities in genes we can determine what exact gene or genes are responsible
for the disease.

A method of analyzing chromosomes
is flow cytometry. In flow cytometry, individual chromosomes are held in aqueous
suspensions and passed in single file through one or more laser beams for
analysis. This allows analyzing thousands of chromosomes per second.

The main goals of the Human Genome
Project are to develop resources useful for genome research, develop DNA
mapping strategies, make ordered clone maps and DNA sequences of human
chromosomes, and use the sequences to study genome organization and variation. The
main goal, however, is not just to determine the exact sequence of the DNA, but
to find the significance of specific genes and how they interact with each other.

Analysis:

Although there is proof that intelligence is at least partly
genetic, scientists still haven’t found the specific gene or genes that are responsible
for a person’s intelligence. It is likely, since there seem to be different “types”
of intelligences, that intellectual abilities do not rely solely on one gene
but on the interaction of many genes. In order to identify these genes,
scientists would have to collect a large group of people who score
above-average on intelligence tests, sequence their chromosomes, and analyze
them to look for similarities among the group. This is easier said than done, scientist
would have to analyze the entire genome of a person and what makes it all the
more difficult is that intelligence is made up of different factors and there
is no clear, exact definition of what intelligence is.

Questions:

What would be the benefits of finding the genes responsible for intelligence?

Monday, April 9, 2012

Summary:

In the fourth century B. C. E.,
Aristotle introduced the idea that the mind was a blank slate. On the other
hand, we had Plato’s idea that the human mind was an entity that pre-existed
somewhere in the heavens before it was sent down to Earth.

In the seventeenth century, John
Locke, an English philosopher, brought back the idea of the mind being a “white
paper”. His idea of the tabula rasa was that humans were born with an empty
mind and that knowledge is gained solely by one’s sensory experiences. This
idea emphasized that an individual had the freedom to author his or her own
personality. However, Locke believed that humans were born with some innate
ability to process experience.

Rene Descartes, a French philosopher,
believed that humans were born with some pre-existing ideas. These ideas,
according to him, included knowledge in mathematics and the belief in God.

Continental rationalist Gottfried
Wilhelm Leibniz recognized that there must exist a middle ground between the
two extreme ideas of Locke and Descartes. He believed that although rational
ideas are innate, they must be “activated” by experience.

Nowadays, it has been proven that
most of the brain is preprogrammed to take in, process, and organize sensory
input. These parts then improve their ability to perform their tasks throughout
the person’s life. The only part of the
brain that has been proven to be a “blank slate” is the neo-cortex which is
involved in thought and decision-making.

Analysis:

Even before people had a deep understanding of the brain and
the mind, philosophers like Aristotle and Plato were making predictions on
whether intelligence was something inborn or something gained through
experience.

According to Locke and Aristotle humans were born with an
empty mind and intelligence depended mostly on sensory experiences. On the other
side of the argument were Descartes and Plato who believed that humans were
already born with some type of innate intelligence. Leibniz unified both ideas
to resemble something more like the ideas we have today. He said that the brain
was already preprogrammed but that needed input in order to function.

Questions:How could philosophers like Aristotle and Plato make predictions on whether intelligence was a matter of nature or nurture when they didn't even have an understanding on how the brain worked?

New World Encyclopedia. (2008, April 04). Tabula rusa. Retrieved from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Tabula_rasa